markfp2
-
Posts
3,178 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by markfp2
-
-
> {quote:title=markbeckuaf wrote:}{quote} TCM has really spoiled us, hasn't it?
You are so right. I even find it hard to watch movies on the premium channels. Sure there aren't commercials, but 99% of them are pan and scan and I hate it when they squeeze the end credits into a little box that's too small to read and put promotional stuff in the rest of the space. I'm seriously considering dropping them as soon as DirecTV starts to carry TCMHD. I'll use the money I save to buy a new HD TV.
-
I've gotten to the point where I almost never watch a film with commercials in it. About the only time is if my wife is watching something and I join her. Even then, I won't if it's AMC because I swore never to watch them again, when they made their change, and I've kept to that.
-
Well, everyone to their own taste, but you won't find much support for it on these boards.
-
> {quote:title=HollywoodGolightly wrote:}{quote}
> Has anyone seen the new 15th-anniversary T-Shirts yet? They seem kind of cool.
I've got one, been wearing it all summer. As I said here last spring, I wish they'd put it or something like it out as a sweatshirt. In my little corner of the world, even now, it gets a kind of chilly for T-shirts. Are ya listening TCM?
-
I usually get mine within the first half of the month so now I'd start to worry. Call them, they're usually good about sending replacements. From past experience, it appears that more often then not the problem is with the post office, a couple of times all I received was the cover.
-
> {quote:title=musicalnovelty wrote:}{quote}
> We need to see more pre-1935 Fox movies on The Fox Movie Channel!
Better yet, since FMC doesn't seem interested in showing more than a handful, how about them making a deal so they can be shown on TCM. That way they'll be given the respect those film deserves. It drives me nuts that FMC superimposes the rating over the first 15 or 20 seconds of the credits.
-
Lynn, Fred is correct he wasn't prosecuted, but did lose his collection. There were others, but I don't recall any names, mostly behind the scenes people as I recall. In Roddy's case, he was well known and I think it all was mainly for show with the idea of putting the fear into other collectors. It worked, collectors from coast to coast were terrified that the next knock on the door would be the FBI.
Another thing I recall was that the feds would pose as both dealers and collectors and would advertise in film publications like The Big Reel and Classic Film Collector (which is now Classic Images). Anybody replying would most certainly get visitors at the door and could kiss their collections goodbye. I think unless they were big time dealers they got off with just having their collections seized and weren't prosecuted. Those were bad days for film collectors.
-
I had the same problem today too. I tried both Firefox and IE. I don't know how long it was happening over all, but it took me about an hour and a half before I could get in. Maybe the IT people at TCM had it down to work on it. One can only hope.
-
Well, that's good for some people, but for me (and I think a lot of others here) the best way to see it is with a pristine 35mm print projected on a 50 foot screen.
-
> {quote:title=fredbaetz wrote:}{quote} ...and some new exec.said they were getting rid of a lot of these old movies no one wanted to see any more and they needed the space.
It's sad to say that there have been stories of similar incidents around for years. The worst one I ever heard was that in the late 40's Universal cleaned out their New York City warehouse and tossed all their silent films into the Hudson River to be used as fill for some building project. Again, the excuse was "nobody wanted to see silent films anymore."
Yet, these were the very studios that in the 1970's, were having the FBI raid collectors' homes and seize their films for copyright violations. Most of those prints, ones the studios wanted destroyed to save space, had been saved by editors and other people concerned with our film heritage. The studios didn't want them, but sure didn't want anybody else to have them either.
-
I had a good friend (sadly, he's no longer with us) who was a serious film collector with a very large collection. He had a pretty nice 16mm print of the original version which I got to see many years ago and it was an excellent film. I remember him telling me that in all his years as a collector and with all his contacts, he never came across anybody else with another print. When he passed away, he left his collection to the George Eastman House in Rochester, NY. I assume that print went with the others. If so, then we know that there's at least one print in good hands.
As for being it public domain, it doesn't really matter if there isn't any prints of it. Personally, if Eastman House does have a print, I'd much rather see somebody come up with the money to have it restored (which could then be copyrighted) and have a proper DVD release done. I hate the thought that horrible PD copies would be the only way to see it.
-
> {quote:title=HollywoodGolightly wrote:}{quote}
> What do you do if the hard drive crashes?
>
> Seriously, 200 hours is pretty good for me, I still transfer everything I want to keep to DVD-R as soon as possible, just in case....
I know what you're saying. I have 100 hours and unless I'm gone on vacation for a couple of weeks I try and transfer everything I want to save to DVD within a week or so. I had one of my older TiVos die last year and while I still had a few episodes of tv shows on it, nothing of importance was lost. I really can't imagine why anybody would seriously need one with such a large capacity.
I
-
The ultimate DVR for the TCM fan is from a company that sells DVRs modified with larger capacity hard drives. The largest is 975 hours and sells for almost $500. Still, that might not be enough for some of us.
-
Terrence, welcome to the boards. When Fox bought the remake rights, most likely they also bought the rights to the original film making that one a Fox film too.
It's not that uncommon for films from one company to end up the property of another. More often than not the new owners don't bother to redo the credits, except for maybe putting their logo on the beginning.
-
Welcome to the boards. Although I couldn't find it, I seem to recall that tcmprogrammr explained once that TCM has to lease every film they show and those leases don't allow them to show full-length films online. I suppose they could show films that are in the public domain, but those are already available on dozens of other sites.
Incidentally, since you're new here, tcmprogrammr is TCM's vice president in charge of programming and he regularly reads these boards and sometimes he or a member of his staff will reply.
-
Well, certainly James Hilton who's novels gave us these films
GOODBYE, MR CHIPS (1939)
LOST HORIZON (1937)
KNIGHT WITHOUT ARMOR (1937)
RANDOM HARVEST (1942)
SO WELL REMEMBERED (1947)
-
CURSE OF THE UNDEAD is a dandy little film, although I always think of it as a horror film rather than a western, but it is both. Being it's a Universal film and TCM seems to have struck a new deal with them I bet there's a good chance it will turn up someday. I haven't seen it in years and would sure like to.
-
Welcome to the boards. If you didn't already, try clicking on "shopping" on the top of this page. It will take you to TCM's retail partner Movies Unlimited. They carry just about any DVD that's in release and have a large selection of concerts and musical performances. You can also try the official PBS sales site [www.shoppbs.org] If it's out on DVD one them should have it.
-
I'm not saying it's porn or not because I haven't seen it. My point was that many, many people consider all X-rated films as porn and they would be the first ones to complain on these boards or write letters to the editor complaining that "TCM Has Gone Porn".
-
> {quote:title=PrinceSaliano wrote:}{quote}> The price needs to come down some.
I agree that it would be nice if the prices were lower, but this was basically an experiment by Warner into a new method of release. I imagine that prices were set based on their anticipated costs and sales. If sales exceed their expectations I would think it would be likely that we'll not only see more titles, but either lower prices or at least more opportunities for discounts.
Still, I stand by what I said, if we don't support them then we'll have nobody to blame but ourselves if this thing fails and other classics never see the light of day.
-
Hi Jamie, welcome to the boards. I've checked several sources and can't find any mention of an alternate version. What do you think is missing?
I haven't seen the film yet, but did record it. I've found the running time listed as either 102 or 103 minutes, depending on the source. I timed my recording and it ran 102 minutes and about 25 seconds, so the discrepancy is a result of which way time was rounded off. It's pretty common to find that. As far as TCM is concerned they never edit films they show so whatever the distributor sent them is what they aired.
Perhaps, if you can tell us more, somebody who has seen the film can help you. Good luck.
-
I didn't watch it live, but recorded it on DVD. I looked at it last night and thought perhaps I just had a bad disc. Obviously that wasn't the case. Usually when somebody complains about a reception problem it turns out to be with their cable company or a bad receiver or cable, but this time it looks like it was at TCM's end.
Hopefully TCM can get another copy and reschedule it.
-
I've said before that it's important for all of us, who buy DVDs, to support the Warner Archive Collection because if it's successful it may help open the vault door at other studios. If the studios see it as a way to make money from their libraries without the expense of a full-blown DVD release they might just give it a shot. I know some folks complain because Warner Archives are bare-bones releases without extras, but these are films that otherwise might not be released at all.
-
> {quote:title=thegentleman wrote:}{quote} > I am curious what the general feeling is on TCM about what is actually a classic movie. For me it has to have stood the test of time, something that you want to see again and again,
>
Welcome to the boards, we can always use another gentleman around here. I agree with you that to be a classic a film must stand the test of time, but what amount of time it should be is something that has been known to start fights among film buffs.
Some people think it should be a set length of time like twenty, thirty or maybe forty years. Others think it should be a period of time such as the 1920's through the 1940's and nothing else. Still others believe (and I'm one of them) that, taking all other things into consideration, age is of less importance than the other qualities of the film. Age alone doesn't make a great film.
You're going to get a lot of opinions here. Get your referee shirt out and have fun.
THIS Movie Channel
in General Discussions
Posted
I can't figure that out either. Even with multiple channels they still pretty much run the same films, just shuffle them around the schedules. Even the Encore channels, like Mystery, which were genre driven, have become a blur as to what they show now. The only exception is Westerns which does keep to it's original format. I'd love to see a premium classics channel.